About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CNBC 5
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
CNNW 2
CNN 1
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
to be leon panetta's last day as the pentagon chief, but after a rocky confirmation hearing, senators' demands for other answers the replacement has been temporarily blocked. this is "special report." ♪ ♪ >> bret: good evening. i'm bret baier. bags are packed. ready to head out of town but leon panetta isn't riding nauf the sunset of california retirement yet. senate republicans are blocking a vote on panetta's embattled replacement over among other things questions about the libya terror attack last september. mike emanuel on what is holding up chuck hagel. >> they successfully delayed chuck hagel's controversial nomination as secretary of defense. late today, procedural vote failed after senator john mccain had made the case for waiting until after next week's recess. >> i think that is a sufficient period of time to get answers to outstanding questions and i think that senator hagel after that period of time deserves a cloture vote and a uvote on his. >> i have valued your thoughts and your contributions. i think most all of us in public office feel that way. >> among questions
is making the issue complicated. >> they are talking about a way to save money in the pentagon and they will furlough the civilian workers one day. also the president put together a way to delay the whole thing for a couple of months but that doesn't make sense. and so far boehner has been effective in saying mr. president you came up with the idea, you solve the problem. and yesterday instead of the president picking up the phone and working with local leaders, he called local stations and did local interviews. if you get the sense we are moving from one crisis to another, you are not crazy, you are right. it's just hard to make sense of how many different things could kill us. here's rush limbaugh yesterday. >> have you of if you listen to obama and his minions in the news media, they are all running neck and neck. maybe ought to explore some sort of sequester control because it's out of control. he wanted the spending cuts a year ago, now he doesn't want to go anywhere near the spending cuts but it's his plan. sequester was his idea. now he's complaining that these cuts will
the same way? >> i don't think so, and i disagree with the premise. we look at the pentagon right now. leeon panetta for a year refused to plan for the sequester. so now if hagel gets in -- and he will -- the first thing he will get hit with is the whole chaotic element of the budget and he is not going to be able to deal with that very well. mr. obama is getting what he wants. he wants a compliant man and is going to get it. >> how do you know that hagel doesn't take himself out of the running? >> i can't imagine a man with his ego would take himself out of the running. he has made it clear he wants the job. at this point i don't know why because he will have more problems than he can have solutions and not going to be backed by the kind of team that he really would need there look, we have not had a general really rebel against what a president wanted to do since 1996. the people who are there now are good people, yes, but they're not as strong as they need to be to make hagel a good secretary of defense. along at what happened when he wad less ash 'ton, same kind of experience and
lawmakers the pentagon itself is partly to blame. jd gordon, former defense department spokesman for donald rumsfeld and robert gates. honor to have you on our program. >> honor to be here, bill. bill: what do you think about what he is making the point he is making? >> understand that he is frustrated but you know i think a lot of frustration should go back to the obama administration. it was the obama administration insist we have sequester if the debt super-committee failed to reach an agreement and they failed to reach an agreement. i remember very specifically at one of the presidential debates president obama told governor romney sequestration is not going to happen. two weeks away and looks like it will happen. it will be devastating for the military. we're talking about curtailed military operations around the globe. reduced funding for mint nance and training. 800,000 dod citizens are looking for furlough or forced time without pay. this will be devastating and we're just getting started with sequestration. bill: the last point you just made a lot of people haven't talked about. 80
're going to cut pretty significantly from the pentagon's budget. your move, mr. president. >> he wants revenues to go up again and john boehner's response is, we just did that. >> that's the thing. we always heard, you guys raise taxes, cut defense spending and then we will come back with a compromise on spending cuts. but, no, we raise taxes, we come forward with pentagon cuts and the president comes back with, we want to tax more americans. let's raise taxes again. >> you wonder where this ends now then, right, because if the president's not going to go anywhere without more revenue, where does this take us? we have the plan in place that was supposed to do both of those things. we're at that point on friday and we will hit it and neither side is going to get to it. what's the end game here. >> how do you think this is goin going? >> it's going terribly. >> republicans always lose these budget battles. i get a sense for the first time the president is overplaying his hand. talking about fear and loathing, locusts ascending from the heavens, now talking about more tax cuts, your dog w
, when it comes to cuts, maybe it's not as bad as the pentagon and others are warning. because he says republicans should argue that overall defense spending is still on the rise. now, cornyn admits that this is even a change for him. help said he would listen to leon panetta and others say these across the board spending cuts would be devastating. but he says he looked into it and he decided the best message for himself and other republicans, and of course this is the number two senate republican, is to say, you know what, maybe it's not going to be that bad. but as you well know, wolf, arguing that any cuts in military spending is an anthem ma to most republicans so i would imagine he's going to get some backlash on that messaging when he talks to republicans about it tomorrow. >> when it comes to gop legislation to prevent the negative impact from the sequester, what are you hearing, what's going on? >> reporter: what's going on right now is there is sort of the leading idea among senate republicans for a proposal that they will probably vote on this week. is to give the president f
the government watching? >>brian: the government will provide life lock for the pentagon, which we offer now is some kind of protection because we don't want all our secret cables to be exposed by idiots like the one we just had -- >> that's different from what the president did the other day. the government has an obligation to protect the pentagon. the government does not have an obligation to protect you or fox news or me or "the new york times." so what's the government going to do? the government is going to share information with major internet providers. and pretty soon it's going to say to the internet providers, all that information we gave you about us, we now want information about you. we want to know about kilmeade's e-mails. we're worried about him. we want to know who he's pha*eulg -- e-mailing so we can keep him safe. baloney. protect the government, but leave the rest of us with privacy. if you're going to interfere with the internet, should it be done by the command of one person -- the president -- or should it be done after great national debate and the congress? >>gretch
the pentagon to allocate the cuts in their best judgment rather than forcing certain cuts on them. that would be one helpful thing, but i think the bargaining power almost requires that we allow it to happen before -- before anybody is going to get serious about their negotiation. i agree. it's a terrible idea, but it's maybe a bad idea whose time has come. >> laura you say it's not next to happen. >> right. >> you say there's no debt crisis. how would you describe the 16 trillion debt. >> so what i would say, look, there were estimates out there at the beginning of the year we needed about $4 trillion to stabilize the debt-to-gdp ratio. we're about 60% of the way there. we do need additional revenue increases or spending cuts over the next decade, but let me emphasize. over the next decade. not at a moment in time when the economy has 7.9% unemployment and is operating under its capacity to the tune of maybe six percentage points below capacity. this is a terrible time to do what needs to be done, and it's also a terrible way to do it because it's like telling a business you have to cut ever
he knows and doesn't know about the pentagon because he didn't know much. why are the democrats going to lay down for this? >> if i were the democrats and i'm looking at a republican whose foreign policy views are very popular with the likes of pat buchanan, might have some second thoughts about that. nice a guy as pat is, his foreign policy view ace little bit crazy. chuck hagel obviously holds some views, has empathies that are out of the mainstream of the republicans and democrats. we have two parts that agree on a very aggressive interventionist policy. >> besides president obama, i admit the president usually gets his own. i don't see anybody laying down for this guy. and i read today, okay, i read pretty your stuff. i read it from a lot of stuff. he is refusing to disclose his financials. particularly his foreign financials. i don't know how you get through under those circumstances. >> the democrats will support him. the more important issue for them is barack obama. barack obama is still the number one issue in politics today. and democrats need his support to win in 2014. so
from defense and domestic programs. that would mean temporarily laying off thousands of pentagon staffers. air traffic controllers, border guards and federal agents. carl cameron is in d.c. carl? >> thanks, shep. senate democrats today actually proposed their alternative to all these across the board cuts. they come up at the end of the month. it's $55 billion in spending cuts. and $55 billion in tax increases. but ta up $650 billion already this year. so when republicans heard that they i. the democrats were talking about more, the g.o.p. said no way. not a solution. even they know it can't pass. political stunt designed to mask the fact they have offered no solutions. >> congressional budget office estimates the cuts would trim 8% off the department of defense and about 5% to 6% off othe rest of the agencies. democrats insist that any solution to decades of deficit spending has to include tax hikes on the rich. is is it a spending problem? no. it's because we have a misallocation of capital. a misallocation of wealth. we have a tax code that is skewed for the wealthy. >> so rep
this command, cyber command, saying we have to defend our infrastructure, and the pentagon's infrastructure to be sure, and then we have to have capability. those kinds will help deter some of the activities taking place right now. >> i remember once interviewing a former french official who was in charge of the french intelligence operation against our splekt wal property and trade secrets, and he was very open about it as a retired espionage agent for france. thank you very much, bill cohen. >> good to be with you. >> up neck, fighting that cyber war, we talk to former homeland security chief michael cherthoff. up for an oscar and detained at the airport? you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" only on msnbc. commitment to the gulf. and every day since, we've worked hard to keep it. today, the beaches and gulf are open for everyone to enjoy. we've shared what we've learned, so we can all produce energy more safely. bp's also committed to america. we support nearly two-hundred-fifty thousand jobs and invest more here than anywhere else. we're working to fuel america for generations to co
's not going to be any opportunity to cut pentagon spending in any serious way if you don't go over the cliff. so there is some stuff in there that i as a democrat don't like. but i think everybody's going to put something in the pot in order to balance the deficit. we did a lousy job in january on the tax side and i hope that -- i think it's better to go over the cliff than do a lousy job -- >> how many people do you know on your side of the field who actually agree with you? >> very few. look they're politicians. they want to spend as much money as they possibly can and they don't want to pay for it. >> who agrees with you? >> oh, i don't know. i bet -- oh, god, joe agrees with me. >> you forgot. the other thing, howard, and i'm just alluding to it, there will be no return to the bush era tax rates on anyone under $400,000? >> right. >> okay. so take that amount of money, whatever that is per year. how much do you need -- how many loopholes do you need to close? what is the marginal rate have to be on people above 400 to replace that potential revenue? it's 100%, isn't it? >> but i don't --
in discretionary. we could actually clean all the waste out of the pentagon which is well over $100 billion a year. it still doesn't solve our problem. we cannot solve our problem unless we change medicare to save it and put a competitive model into our health care system that will allocate that scarce resource. it's really interesting. just yesterday the cms has finished going through all this bidding on durable medical equipment. and the statement coming from cms, for the first time, is hey, we just figured out competition works. about a 41% savings on durable medical equipment not just for the federal government but for the seniors who are going to be doing their co-pay. so competition works. and if it will work -- it works in this area, health care will work in the rest. we've just got to have a little pain. that happened to me as a child frequently with a popular switch. >> okay. well, there you go. >> there's a bumper sticker for 2014. >> chuck, good morning. senator, good morning. chuck, quick question for you. what are the odds you place on sequester going through and two, a government shu
taking the civilian workers when our country is still at war at the pentagon and putting them on four days a week work is still waste. let those who think they've identified waste and no doubt there are efficiencies that can be found put their proposals forward and let those proposals be weighed in the context of a balanced approach. the question isn't whether we should leave any category immune. the question is whether we should have a balanced approach. and to assume, before anyone has laid out any kind of vision of how that $85 billion a year could be cut, that it must be possible and that everything else has to be ruled out seems to me to be a extraordinarily irresponsible approach. of course there are instances of waste in the federal government. there are also instances of huge unmet needs of diseases where we could find cures that save tens of thousands of people's lives in the next several years. but we're cutting the budget instead and denying ourselves the chances to find those cures. of infrastructure investments where we're risking more bridges collapsing and all we're doi
, you don't care. >> i guess, but i don't. i don't care. >>> the pentagon chief for the f-35 warplane is slamming his partner lockheed martin. he's accusing them of trying to squeeze every nickel out of the u.s. government faults them for seeing the long-term benefits of the project. >>> and tesla ceo eland musk vowing to pay back an energy deficit loan in half the time required by the government. the company receives a doe loan in 2010 and made the first payment of nearly $13 million in december. >> by the way, did you see yesterday -- remember we had -- there was a big debate about the test drive of the tesla in "the new york times." >> yeah. uh-huh. >> and phil lebeau -- >> went well. then edmonds did one yesterday. >> how did that go? >> not so well. the whole interior screen that sort of is the hub of the whole car, it stopped working. >> i don't understand this debate anyway. if you want to go a long trip like that, wouldn't you take a different car? rent a car or -- >> yeah. phil made the point. this is what you do -- >> andrew made the point, too. >> if you feel green and you
claim the pentagon shouldn't be cutting back on critical programs when the tv channel is producer workout programs. but dick durbin says that's missing the point and the forced budget cuts by law don't give departments much discretion can on where to cut. >> i can tell you, it's never that simple and they know it. when you start moving money this late in the game and with few options, your hands are tied. >> it's mandated by law that the attorney general and fbi director take government flights with secure for national security reason. they just want the government to manage its money more ee specific tifl. wolf? >> thanks very much for that report. >>> for 500 years, the swiss guard has kept the pope safe from harm. that job has changed a lot over the years. coming up, cnn talks to a former swiss guard that tells all about the time he spent at the vatican. ♪ (train horn) vo: wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line, infinite possibilities. so i used my citi thankyou card to pick up some accessories. a new belt. some nylons. and what girl wou
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)